telegram-react-to-story

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations indicate a write operation (readOnlyHint=false). The description adds the notable behavior of removing a reaction via empty string, which is not captured in annotations. No further behavioral details provided, but the tool is simple.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Single sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and key usage nuance. No wasted words, perfectly front-loaded.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers core functionality. It does not explain effects of repeated reactions or error conditions, but given the simplicity, it is sufficiently complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% and includes descriptions for all parameters. The description only repeats the emoji removal behavior, adding no new meaning to other parameters. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description clearly states the tool reacts to a story with an emoji or removes the reaction by passing an empty string. It is specific to stories, distinguishing it from sibling tool 'telegram-send-reaction' which targets messages.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides a clear use case (react or remove) but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or state when not to use. However, the story-specific nature implicitly guides selection.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.